MUHAMMAD ASLAM vs SHER AHMED AND OTHERS
This petition arises out of the acquittal of the respondents for the murder of Ashraf by the trial court, which was upheld by the High Court in revision. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether interference with concurrent findings of fact regarding acquittal was warranted upon a reappraisal of evidence. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, holding that the petitioner's counsel raised no question of law and failed to provide any compelling reason for the court to interfere with the concurrent findings of fact arrived at by the courts below. The key principle laid down is that the Supreme Court will not ordinarily reappraise evidence to interfere with concurrent findings of acquittal in the absence of a substantial question of law or serious legal error by the lower courts.
- Whether the Supreme Court will reappraise evidence to interfere with concurrent findings of acquittal?
- Does the dismissal of a petition against acquitted co-accused affect the case of an absconding co-accused?
ORDER
' ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.-This petition by Muhammad Aslam is directed against the acquittal of Sher Ahmad, and Mumtaz alias Taj, who were accused alongwith one Muhammad Akram for the murder of Ashraf. Muhammad Akram accused, however, absconded and the case of the two respondents was separated. They were tried by the learned Sessions Judge, Attock but were acquitted by him vide judgment, dated 23-9-1982. The petitioner filed a revision against their acquittal before the High Court which was dismissed.
' Hence the present petition.
2. We have heard the petitioner's counsel. He has not raised any question of law but only wants us to reappraise the evidence. He has not been able to put forward any good reason why we should interfere in the concurrent finding of fact arrived at by the learned Courts below by reappraising the evidence afresh. The petition is, therefore, dismissed.
3. It may, however, be clarified that dismissal of this petition shall not have any effect on the case of Muhammad Akram, the third accused who has absconded and has not yet been apprehended.